I've given it some thought and finally came up with the perfect answer to the whole debate on Article 2 of the UUA By-laws.
Keep the Purposes. Drop the Principles.
Simple.
Showing posts with label mission. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mission. Show all posts
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Why I'm Still Writing On This
ChaliceChick asked me why I'm still writing on this. I hope this post will explain some.
I was raised in a very working class home and church was a big part of my life. We did lots of things for the church and traveled quite extensively because of it. I know that this is coloring my view of the whole registration/hotel issue and I don't apologize for that. This is more than about $15 for me.
I find it amazing that other comparably sized religious groups find ways to accomodate those of lesser means and yet we seem to keep having problems.
I know this is a really short explanation, but hopefully it will shed some light on me.
I was raised in a very working class home and church was a big part of my life. We did lots of things for the church and traveled quite extensively because of it. I know that this is coloring my view of the whole registration/hotel issue and I don't apologize for that. This is more than about $15 for me.
I find it amazing that other comparably sized religious groups find ways to accomodate those of lesser means and yet we seem to keep having problems.
I know this is a really short explanation, but hopefully it will shed some light on me.
Why Frontenac? or Class and District Assembly pt.2
oh my dear readers! I truly did not expect to start off a firestorm, but I might as well go with it.
Since ChaliceChick did some research on hotels in the area of the Hilton-Frontenac, I decided to do a little more research, both on that hotel and some others. But a little info first.
Last year, in Oak Brook, the rooms were in the $90s (I can't find a hotel receipt but do remember that much), but less than $100, at the Marriott. (I do find it interesting that we will be paying more in a suburb of St. Louis than we did in a suburb of Chicago)
In 2006, in downtown Madison, the rooms were $85.
In 2005, in Arlington Heights (another suburb of Chicago), the rooms were $74 at the Sheraton.
So I don't think it's irrational to ask this question: WHY FRONTENAC?
Here is a little info on the Hilton-Frontenac: it has 263 rooms and it's normal rate is $143.10. Yet if the district had chosen the Hilton at the St. Louis Airport, it would have picked a bigger hotel (395 rooms) and one with a lower rate ($89.00).
But even more than that......why choose Frontenac, which only has 1 choice, when you could have gone to the airport or Westport and had many?
Let's look at some more hotels at the airport.
The Renaissance has 393 rooms and a rate of $89.00. The Marriott has 601 rooms and a cost of $89.00. Both of these would have had ample meeting space. Then there are the smaller hotels if one needed/wanted to go elsewhere. And most are within walking distance
Then there's Westport (as you can see, I know a little about where hotels are clustered in St. Louis). The biggest hotel at Westport is the Sheraton. It has 2 hotels there with a combined number of rooms of 510 (300 in one and 210 in the other) and ample meeting space. There are also a number of hotels in/around Westport within walking distance of the Sheraton if people wanted to stay somewhere else for whatever reason.
So again.......WHY FRONTENAC?
Since ChaliceChick did some research on hotels in the area of the Hilton-Frontenac, I decided to do a little more research, both on that hotel and some others. But a little info first.
Last year, in Oak Brook, the rooms were in the $90s (I can't find a hotel receipt but do remember that much), but less than $100, at the Marriott. (I do find it interesting that we will be paying more in a suburb of St. Louis than we did in a suburb of Chicago)
In 2006, in downtown Madison, the rooms were $85.
In 2005, in Arlington Heights (another suburb of Chicago), the rooms were $74 at the Sheraton.
So I don't think it's irrational to ask this question: WHY FRONTENAC?
Here is a little info on the Hilton-Frontenac: it has 263 rooms and it's normal rate is $143.10. Yet if the district had chosen the Hilton at the St. Louis Airport, it would have picked a bigger hotel (395 rooms) and one with a lower rate ($89.00).
But even more than that......why choose Frontenac, which only has 1 choice, when you could have gone to the airport or Westport and had many?
Let's look at some more hotels at the airport.
The Renaissance has 393 rooms and a rate of $89.00. The Marriott has 601 rooms and a cost of $89.00. Both of these would have had ample meeting space. Then there are the smaller hotels if one needed/wanted to go elsewhere. And most are within walking distance
Then there's Westport (as you can see, I know a little about where hotels are clustered in St. Louis). The biggest hotel at Westport is the Sheraton. It has 2 hotels there with a combined number of rooms of 510 (300 in one and 210 in the other) and ample meeting space. There are also a number of hotels in/around Westport within walking distance of the Sheraton if people wanted to stay somewhere else for whatever reason.
So again.......WHY FRONTENAC?
Monday, February 18, 2008
Class and District Assembly, or What I'm Asking For pt.2
Well dear readers I'm having so much fun being in a cranky mood I think I'll stay that way.
I decided to look up a few things about where the CMwD assembly is going to be. I'm not thrilled. So here's the next thing I'm asking for.
CAN WE NOT HAVE DISTRICT ASSEMBLY IN THE MOST EXPENSIVE SUBURBS??????
This year the assembly is in Frontenac, a ritzy suburb of St. Louis. Last year the assembly was in Oak Brook, one of the ritzy suburbs of Chicago. Not only do these suburbs have class issues, these suburbs also have racial issues. Why are we picking places like these? Aren't there hotels that fit the district's requirements that are in places other than Frontenac and Oak Brook? Or are we really trying to send subliminal messages to those in lower socio-economic classes and to people of color that we don't really want you?
I decided to look up a few things about where the CMwD assembly is going to be. I'm not thrilled. So here's the next thing I'm asking for.
CAN WE NOT HAVE DISTRICT ASSEMBLY IN THE MOST EXPENSIVE SUBURBS??????
This year the assembly is in Frontenac, a ritzy suburb of St. Louis. Last year the assembly was in Oak Brook, one of the ritzy suburbs of Chicago. Not only do these suburbs have class issues, these suburbs also have racial issues. Why are we picking places like these? Aren't there hotels that fit the district's requirements that are in places other than Frontenac and Oak Brook? Or are we really trying to send subliminal messages to those in lower socio-economic classes and to people of color that we don't really want you?
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Some People We Want Are On A Fixed Income, or What I'm Asking For
Hello dear readers.
Ogre asks me what I'm looking for when I'm talking about things related to District Assembly. I think that's a legitimate question and one that should be it's own post instead of a comment on the last post.
Ok....here's what I'm asking for. If you'll read my post "Sleeping Arrangements", you'll see that I'm asking that there be a lower cost alternative to the ritzy hotels that we use for the annual meeting. That is the fixed cost. And I know that it might just be the way I was raised, but when the "special" room rate is $105+tax, then we're talking about the only people who can afford that are in a different tax bracket (or have expense accounts). Unless there are 4 people in a room, that is a high cost for a church meeting.
What I'm asking for is the acknowledgement that there are people in our churches who want to be involved who are in fixed incomes, and try to make some accomodations for that. All the great religions ask us to remember the least of these. Doesn't seem to be much rememberance of that in UU circles.
As for the students, it still goes back to the fixed costs of the hotel room and transportation, as you can always bring your own food and food costs are mutable. But that is still $105+tax for 2 nights. If there were a lower cost alternative, then maybe there would be greater participation by people of all socio-economic classes in the work of our districts and association.
That's what I'm asking for.
Ogre asks me what I'm looking for when I'm talking about things related to District Assembly. I think that's a legitimate question and one that should be it's own post instead of a comment on the last post.
Ok....here's what I'm asking for. If you'll read my post "Sleeping Arrangements", you'll see that I'm asking that there be a lower cost alternative to the ritzy hotels that we use for the annual meeting. That is the fixed cost. And I know that it might just be the way I was raised, but when the "special" room rate is $105+tax, then we're talking about the only people who can afford that are in a different tax bracket (or have expense accounts). Unless there are 4 people in a room, that is a high cost for a church meeting.
What I'm asking for is the acknowledgement that there are people in our churches who want to be involved who are in fixed incomes, and try to make some accomodations for that. All the great religions ask us to remember the least of these. Doesn't seem to be much rememberance of that in UU circles.
As for the students, it still goes back to the fixed costs of the hotel room and transportation, as you can always bring your own food and food costs are mutable. But that is still $105+tax for 2 nights. If there were a lower cost alternative, then maybe there would be greater participation by people of all socio-economic classes in the work of our districts and association.
That's what I'm asking for.
Yet Another Thing About District Assembly
I seem to be having problems with both GA and District Assembly this year. Must be going through a cranky phase.
Anyway, dear readers, I went through the brochure for the CMwD meeting again and saw that there is a Young Adult/Full-Time Student rate of $45. But guess what, dear friends; your meals are not included and you still have to pay for your room.
So not only do you still have to pay for a room, pay to get to St. Louis and pay $45 registration, you have to pay for ALL your food. So I guess the District is telling you to bring your own or starve.
Ain't being a UU grand?????
Anyway, dear readers, I went through the brochure for the CMwD meeting again and saw that there is a Young Adult/Full-Time Student rate of $45. But guess what, dear friends; your meals are not included and you still have to pay for your room.
So not only do you still have to pay for a room, pay to get to St. Louis and pay $45 registration, you have to pay for ALL your food. So I guess the District is telling you to bring your own or starve.
Ain't being a UU grand?????
Sleeping Arrangements At District Assembly
Well hello again dear readers.
Steve Caldwell brings up the idea of using local churches as places for people to sleep during District meetings as a way to cut down costs.
I'm all for options, and that is one, but I must be honest and say that my preference is a bed. I just think we ought to be able to find less expensive beds, be able to cut the registration fee and still have a good meeting.
Is there any way that there could be alternative options as far as hotels go? Have the ritzy hotel and have a Days Inn as the other option?
When are we going to acknowledge that the best way to get people to participate is to not have too many financial obstacles in their way?
Steve Caldwell brings up the idea of using local churches as places for people to sleep during District meetings as a way to cut down costs.
I'm all for options, and that is one, but I must be honest and say that my preference is a bed. I just think we ought to be able to find less expensive beds, be able to cut the registration fee and still have a good meeting.
Is there any way that there could be alternative options as far as hotels go? Have the ritzy hotel and have a Days Inn as the other option?
When are we going to acknowledge that the best way to get people to participate is to not have too many financial obstacles in their way?
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Even More On The District Meeting
Hello again my dear readers.
H Sofia reminded me that I had not included the price of meals into my analysis of the upcoming CMwD annual meeting. And I must thank her for that.
Lunch on Saturday and breakfast on Sunday seem to be the only meals included. But where does that leave all us hungry souls on Friday when we arrive in St. Louis? Up ---- creek it looks like to me. So that means one must add something to our $621.14 total for a meal on Friday. Let's assume that you can get a meal for $15-$20/person. (might be pushing it there, as I don't know if there are any restaurants around the hotel and you know the price of a hotel restaurant is going to be more than that) So the price of dinner on Friday will be anywhere between $35 and $50 depending on taxes and tips.
Let's add it up again friends. $621.14+$35=$656.14. Or it could be $621.14+$50=$671.14.
So that means a party of two can do District Assembly for the low, low price of $700. (almost)
And yet we talk about wanting to grow. Growth and expansion of representation doesn't happen when it costs $700 do be a part of things.
H Sofia reminded me that I had not included the price of meals into my analysis of the upcoming CMwD annual meeting. And I must thank her for that.
Lunch on Saturday and breakfast on Sunday seem to be the only meals included. But where does that leave all us hungry souls on Friday when we arrive in St. Louis? Up ---- creek it looks like to me. So that means one must add something to our $621.14 total for a meal on Friday. Let's assume that you can get a meal for $15-$20/person. (might be pushing it there, as I don't know if there are any restaurants around the hotel and you know the price of a hotel restaurant is going to be more than that) So the price of dinner on Friday will be anywhere between $35 and $50 depending on taxes and tips.
Let's add it up again friends. $621.14+$35=$656.14. Or it could be $621.14+$50=$671.14.
So that means a party of two can do District Assembly for the low, low price of $700. (almost)
And yet we talk about wanting to grow. Growth and expansion of representation doesn't happen when it costs $700 do be a part of things.
It's District Meeting Time
Hello dear readers.
I'm looking over the brochure for the Central Midwest District annual meeting and can't help but think about how, in many ways, hypocritical we are.
Registration for the meeting is $155 for a full-time adult. This doesn't count dinner on Saturday evening, which is $35. So, before adding in the price of the hotel room, the price is $190 per adult. Now let's add in the hotel room. The special price for our meeting is $105/night. If you are going to stay both nights (since our meeting runs Fri-Sun), that comes to $210+taxes (which are 14.83%). That total is $241.14. Let's imagine that a couple wants to come to the meeting. Let's add it up, shall we. $155x2=$310. Add in the price of a room which will be $241.14. Add in the banquet at $35/person for a total of $70. The grand total for 3 days at a UU meeting will be $621.14.
$621.14?!?!?!?!?!?
This total, my friends, doesn't even include the cost of getting to St. Louis for those of us who are not locals.
$621.14
And yet we seem to talk a lot about trying to include as many UUs in the process as possible. Why don't we quit telling that tall tale. If we wanted more people involved, we would find a way to do this less expensively.
I know......if you volunteer for two hours the registration gets reduced to $115. Even if both people in my scenario above volunteer, the price is STILL $541.14+expense of getting to St. Louis.
As much as we don't want to talk about it, we don't want you if you can't afford to be one of us.
(and yes, dear readers, I have the same complaint about GA)
I'm looking over the brochure for the Central Midwest District annual meeting and can't help but think about how, in many ways, hypocritical we are.
Registration for the meeting is $155 for a full-time adult. This doesn't count dinner on Saturday evening, which is $35. So, before adding in the price of the hotel room, the price is $190 per adult. Now let's add in the hotel room. The special price for our meeting is $105/night. If you are going to stay both nights (since our meeting runs Fri-Sun), that comes to $210+taxes (which are 14.83%). That total is $241.14. Let's imagine that a couple wants to come to the meeting. Let's add it up, shall we. $155x2=$310. Add in the price of a room which will be $241.14. Add in the banquet at $35/person for a total of $70. The grand total for 3 days at a UU meeting will be $621.14.
$621.14?!?!?!?!?!?
This total, my friends, doesn't even include the cost of getting to St. Louis for those of us who are not locals.
$621.14
And yet we seem to talk a lot about trying to include as many UUs in the process as possible. Why don't we quit telling that tall tale. If we wanted more people involved, we would find a way to do this less expensively.
I know......if you volunteer for two hours the registration gets reduced to $115. Even if both people in my scenario above volunteer, the price is STILL $541.14+expense of getting to St. Louis.
As much as we don't want to talk about it, we don't want you if you can't afford to be one of us.
(and yes, dear readers, I have the same complaint about GA)
Monday, February 4, 2008
Youth Are Nice, They Just Don't Grow A Church
In rant mode, it comes across that I am against youth programming. Or at the very least I am making this an either/or situation. That was not my intention.
Let me state this plainly dear readers. I am not against children/youth and their programming.
I say(and continue to believe) that if a church wants to GROW, they must have a substantive ADULT program. No matter what size their children/youth program, a church does not GROW through said children or youth. They GROW through ADULTS.
This my dear readers is my rant.....there seems to be a backwardness about this that infuriates me. UUs run around in circles talking about wanting to grow then do everything that is antithetical to that growth.
But I shall shut up now before I start another rant.
Let me state this plainly dear readers. I am not against children/youth and their programming.
I say(and continue to believe) that if a church wants to GROW, they must have a substantive ADULT program. No matter what size their children/youth program, a church does not GROW through said children or youth. They GROW through ADULTS.
This my dear readers is my rant.....there seems to be a backwardness about this that infuriates me. UUs run around in circles talking about wanting to grow then do everything that is antithetical to that growth.
But I shall shut up now before I start another rant.
Growth Happens Through ADULT Programming, NOT Youth Programs
Hello dear readers.
I looked at the Winter 2008 issue of Interconnections today and the front page article is about growth through youth programs. So friends, I'm going to go into rant mode again.
Growth happens through ADULT PROGRAMMING, not Youth programs.
I know that there must be somebody out there who reads the studies on church growth. I know there is somebody out there who knows that the growth happens when there is substantive programs for adults (whether they have youth to bring or not).
I know that there has to be somebody out in UU-land who knows that all of this talk of children/youth and family programs leaves out those who are NEITHER. Where is the programming for them?
Singles ministry anyone? How about elder ministry? Empty-nesters? Partnered with no children? Don't these people exist in our churches? Where is the outreach to them?
Alright.....rant's over. Talk amongst yourselves.
I looked at the Winter 2008 issue of Interconnections today and the front page article is about growth through youth programs. So friends, I'm going to go into rant mode again.
Growth happens through ADULT PROGRAMMING, not Youth programs.
I know that there must be somebody out there who reads the studies on church growth. I know there is somebody out there who knows that the growth happens when there is substantive programs for adults (whether they have youth to bring or not).
I know that there has to be somebody out in UU-land who knows that all of this talk of children/youth and family programs leaves out those who are NEITHER. Where is the programming for them?
Singles ministry anyone? How about elder ministry? Empty-nesters? Partnered with no children? Don't these people exist in our churches? Where is the outreach to them?
Alright.....rant's over. Talk amongst yourselves.
Friday, February 1, 2008
Stop Treating Your Church Like the Sierra Club, or Why Tithing Matters pt.2
Oh my dear readers! I was going through UUpdates a few minutes ago and came across this:
Let me suggest a modest proposal which, I believe, can help solve the financial problems of the Unitarian Church of (blank). The proposal is this: take this congregation off of your “charity” list! Do I have your attention yet? If not, I beg you! Remove this congregation from the list of causes and services you support, it doesn’t belong there.
Amen and Hallelu to that!!!!!
Your church is NOT the Sierra Club. (I'm not picking on the Sierra Club, so no comments along that line please) Your church SHOULD hold a different place in your life and deserves to be seen that way.
It's nice to see more UUs talking like this. Gives me hope that one day UUs will actually ASK people to give more than 5% to their church.
Bless you dear minister at the Unitarian Church of (blank). I hope you get everyone in your congregation's attention.
Let me suggest a modest proposal which, I believe, can help solve the financial problems of the Unitarian Church of (blank). The proposal is this: take this congregation off of your “charity” list! Do I have your attention yet? If not, I beg you! Remove this congregation from the list of causes and services you support, it doesn’t belong there.
Amen and Hallelu to that!!!!!
Your church is NOT the Sierra Club. (I'm not picking on the Sierra Club, so no comments along that line please) Your church SHOULD hold a different place in your life and deserves to be seen that way.
It's nice to see more UUs talking like this. Gives me hope that one day UUs will actually ASK people to give more than 5% to their church.
Bless you dear minister at the Unitarian Church of (blank). I hope you get everyone in your congregation's attention.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Why Tithing Matters
Hello dear readers.
While I was scrolling through UUpdates earlier today, I came across this:
“We, the members of the Unitarian Church of Staten Island, challenge YOU, First Unitarian Church of Philadelphia, to a high-five challenge.” This means, they challenge a majority of the pledging units of First Church to give at 5% of their annual adjusted income.
5%?!?!?!?!? The challenge is for 5%?!?!?!?!?!? This is all we're asking of members of our churches? 5%?!?!?!?!?!?!?
This, my friends, explains why the megachurches are building multi-building complexes and UUs can barely build outhouses. 5%?!?!?!?!?!?
When did UUs devalue tithing? And why did this happen? If you want quality you must give money to it. The work of the church needs money. The facilities require upkeep; this requires money. If you want staff, you must be willing to pay them a reasonable salary. And the challenge is for 5%?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Call me old-fashioned, but we need a new(old) attitude. If you believe your church matters to you, you need to give it enough so that it can do its work without worry.
While I was scrolling through UUpdates earlier today, I came across this:
“We, the members of the Unitarian Church of Staten Island, challenge YOU, First Unitarian Church of Philadelphia, to a high-five challenge.” This means, they challenge a majority of the pledging units of First Church to give at 5% of their annual adjusted income.
5%?!?!?!?!? The challenge is for 5%?!?!?!?!?!? This is all we're asking of members of our churches? 5%?!?!?!?!?!?!?
This, my friends, explains why the megachurches are building multi-building complexes and UUs can barely build outhouses. 5%?!?!?!?!?!?
When did UUs devalue tithing? And why did this happen? If you want quality you must give money to it. The work of the church needs money. The facilities require upkeep; this requires money. If you want staff, you must be willing to pay them a reasonable salary. And the challenge is for 5%?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Call me old-fashioned, but we need a new(old) attitude. If you believe your church matters to you, you need to give it enough so that it can do its work without worry.
Saturday, January 5, 2008
Here I Am Baby......Signed, Sealed, Delivered.....I'm Yours
Hello dear readers.
I got to see the end of Barack Obama's speech in Nashua today and kept thinking just how important music is to a gathering. The use of Stevie Wonder (one of the best that R&B has produced) was a good idea. People who are already hyped-up will just bop along to the music and be happy.
So let's talk about the role of music in our churches. What are we doing right and what are we doing wrong?
I got to see the end of Barack Obama's speech in Nashua today and kept thinking just how important music is to a gathering. The use of Stevie Wonder (one of the best that R&B has produced) was a good idea. People who are already hyped-up will just bop along to the music and be happy.
So let's talk about the role of music in our churches. What are we doing right and what are we doing wrong?
Friday, December 28, 2007
Is God Keeping You From Watching The Rose Bowl?
Hello dear readers.
According to the Religion News Service, the UUA is going to be doing some advertising during the bowl games.
I know that many of you dear readers probably like the UUA ad campaign; I think it's a waste of time and money. And I especially think that this one is a real waste of time.
For those of you who are football fans like I am, you know that the people who get the most attention are the people who hold up the John 3:16 signs. Unfortunately for us, we don't have a Bible verse that most of us agree on enough to hold it up on a sign at a football game.
Study after study have shown (and continue to show) that the best way to get people to come to church is through personal invitation. And yet, many UUs don't have the courage to invite someone they know to come to church with them. Growth does not come through osmosis friends. A church must work at it. How many UU churches have something like "Family and Friends Day"? Or any concerted outreach that doesn't involve advertising?
I want to hear stories. Let's talk about the ups and downs of church growth.
According to the Religion News Service, the UUA is going to be doing some advertising during the bowl games.
I know that many of you dear readers probably like the UUA ad campaign; I think it's a waste of time and money. And I especially think that this one is a real waste of time.
For those of you who are football fans like I am, you know that the people who get the most attention are the people who hold up the John 3:16 signs. Unfortunately for us, we don't have a Bible verse that most of us agree on enough to hold it up on a sign at a football game.
Study after study have shown (and continue to show) that the best way to get people to come to church is through personal invitation. And yet, many UUs don't have the courage to invite someone they know to come to church with them. Growth does not come through osmosis friends. A church must work at it. How many UU churches have something like "Family and Friends Day"? Or any concerted outreach that doesn't involve advertising?
I want to hear stories. Let's talk about the ups and downs of church growth.
Friday, November 30, 2007
Suffer the Little Children, or The Price of Milk As A Moral Issue
Hello dear readers. I just returned from grocery shopping and had this post in my head while on the way home.
I always base how I feel about the economy by one thing: the price of a gallon of milk. So I guess you can tell I'm not real thrilled about the state of the economy right now.
The cheapest I saw a gallon a milk today was $3.69. $3.69?!?!?!?!?! This is utterly ridiculous. Luckily for me, I only use milk for cooking and a gallon will last me a while. However I know this is not the case for many, if not most, Americans.
All the world's major religions call for showing compassion and remembering the least of these. Milk is one of the few universal foods and is an important part of the human diet. How does $3.69 for a gallon of milk show compassion? Is it remembering the least among us?
In all of my posts about church growth I've always talked about how me need to look at the megachurches and see what they are doing. I'm going to do it again here. Churches that grow talk about bread-and-butter issues, everyday life issues, in a way that those who don't have graduate degrees can understand. And they do it using scripture from holy books. How many UU churches are talking about the price of milk, not as an economic issue, but a moral one? Where are the UU churches that are talking about the bread-and-butter, everyday life issues that people really worry about?
In all the UU talk about social justice, where are the UU activists who are talking about the these issues? (yes I know that there is the UUs for a Just Economy) Are we working with other religious progressives who have been at the forefront with these kinds of issues?
I always base how I feel about the economy by one thing: the price of a gallon of milk. So I guess you can tell I'm not real thrilled about the state of the economy right now.
The cheapest I saw a gallon a milk today was $3.69. $3.69?!?!?!?!?! This is utterly ridiculous. Luckily for me, I only use milk for cooking and a gallon will last me a while. However I know this is not the case for many, if not most, Americans.
All the world's major religions call for showing compassion and remembering the least of these. Milk is one of the few universal foods and is an important part of the human diet. How does $3.69 for a gallon of milk show compassion? Is it remembering the least among us?
In all of my posts about church growth I've always talked about how me need to look at the megachurches and see what they are doing. I'm going to do it again here. Churches that grow talk about bread-and-butter issues, everyday life issues, in a way that those who don't have graduate degrees can understand. And they do it using scripture from holy books. How many UU churches are talking about the price of milk, not as an economic issue, but a moral one? Where are the UU churches that are talking about the bread-and-butter, everyday life issues that people really worry about?
In all the UU talk about social justice, where are the UU activists who are talking about the these issues? (yes I know that there is the UUs for a Just Economy) Are we working with other religious progressives who have been at the forefront with these kinds of issues?
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
I Believe The Children Are The Future? or, Who Do We Say That We Are pt.3
Dear Readers...I am going to say the most politically incorrect thing that can be said in UU circles, but I truly believe it.
The children are NOT the future of UUism.
The future is NOW people! Church growth does not happen because of youth programs. Church growth happens because you keep the ADULTS who bring the youth. (no ad campaign is going to work unless you have something to back it up) What are you offering them? Why do we have the same number of members now as we did 30 years ago?
Where is the Adult Religious Education curricula? Why has there not been the same effort in adult curricula that there has been in children/youth curricula?
UUs are squandering such an opportunity for real growth by not looking at the situation as it is. The growth in churches regardless of theological perspective is having adult programming that puts people in small group, intimate contact with others. Look at the megachurches (I know you don't want to, but you should). Do you see all the small groups that they have? Do you see what those groups are formed around? Do you see their educational offerings (not just about spiritual matters but on all kinds of things)?
The church is supposed to be about building relationships and spiritual/moral growth. We do ok with the kids in UUism. We just don't do it with adults. And that's the shame.
The children are NOT the future of UUism.
The future is NOW people! Church growth does not happen because of youth programs. Church growth happens because you keep the ADULTS who bring the youth. (no ad campaign is going to work unless you have something to back it up) What are you offering them? Why do we have the same number of members now as we did 30 years ago?
Where is the Adult Religious Education curricula? Why has there not been the same effort in adult curricula that there has been in children/youth curricula?
UUs are squandering such an opportunity for real growth by not looking at the situation as it is. The growth in churches regardless of theological perspective is having adult programming that puts people in small group, intimate contact with others. Look at the megachurches (I know you don't want to, but you should). Do you see all the small groups that they have? Do you see what those groups are formed around? Do you see their educational offerings (not just about spiritual matters but on all kinds of things)?
The church is supposed to be about building relationships and spiritual/moral growth. We do ok with the kids in UUism. We just don't do it with adults. And that's the shame.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Who Do We Say That We Are? pt.2
Because Ogre and I seem to disagree about what Jesus said, I thought I would put the scriptures here on the page. The passage is Matthew 16:13-17. (I'm using the King James Version for fun)
Mt 16:13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
Mt 16:14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
Mt 16:15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
Mt 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Mt 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
So it seems we are both right. I just think that we know the answer to the first question. We know what people, those who know about us anyway, say that we are.
My question is: Who do WE say that WE are? Part of the reason that the new UUA ad campaign is not going over well in a number of UU circles is that there is no there there. Unless we know what we are, there will never be a really effective broad based outreach/mission/planting program in the UUA.
So my question still stands: Who do we say that we are?
Mt 16:13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
Mt 16:14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
Mt 16:15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
Mt 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Mt 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
So it seems we are both right. I just think that we know the answer to the first question. We know what people, those who know about us anyway, say that we are.
My question is: Who do WE say that WE are? Part of the reason that the new UUA ad campaign is not going over well in a number of UU circles is that there is no there there. Unless we know what we are, there will never be a really effective broad based outreach/mission/planting program in the UUA.
So my question still stands: Who do we say that we are?
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Who Do We Say That We Are?
Yes dear readers, for those of you who know your Bible, you will recognize the title of this post as a re-framing of Jesus' question to his disciples: Who do people say that I am?
For this post however, I am not worried about what other people think about us but rather what we think about ourselves.
As I was doing some research today, I came across this survey on the Disciples of Christ website
(http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=jpybty63fj3u4jtg9drdkg_3d_3d). I am really struck by the introduction and thought it would be a good thing to ask UUs.
Here's the introduction:
Who do we say that we are? Identity is a vital concern for all parts of the church. Many long-time (Disciples) worry that we may be losing crucial characteristics of our common life. New (Disciples) want to know about the distinctive gifts of this community of faith. All of us need to have clarity about who we are in order to be faithful and effective witnesses to (Jesus Christ).
A church’s identity must be firmly rooted in scripture and yet flexible enough to adapt to changes in culture and the shifting demands of mission. Early Christians in Jerusalem had to learn what it meant to be faithful in Antioch and Rome. Our (Disciples) forebears, as they moved from the frontier to the city, had to rethink such matters as congregational autonomy and the goal of “restoring” the New Testament church. Today, we wrestle with what it means to be disciples of (our Lord) in a world that is increasingly pluralistic, globally connected, and yet so often violently divided.
Isn't that interesting? If you change the word Unitarian or Universalist for Disciples, this is something we need to wrestle with?
So here are the questions that have come to my mind:
1. What are the crucial characteristics of our common life?
2. What are the distinctive gifts of this community of faith?
3. Since the number of people in our communities of faith do not consider themselves Christian, what are we faithful and effective witnesses to/for?
4. In the same vein, what are we disciples of?
And the main question: Who do we say that we are?
For this post however, I am not worried about what other people think about us but rather what we think about ourselves.
As I was doing some research today, I came across this survey on the Disciples of Christ website
(http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=jpybty63fj3u4jtg9drdkg_3d_3d). I am really struck by the introduction and thought it would be a good thing to ask UUs.
Here's the introduction:
Who do we say that we are? Identity is a vital concern for all parts of the church. Many long-time (Disciples) worry that we may be losing crucial characteristics of our common life. New (Disciples) want to know about the distinctive gifts of this community of faith. All of us need to have clarity about who we are in order to be faithful and effective witnesses to (Jesus Christ).
A church’s identity must be firmly rooted in scripture and yet flexible enough to adapt to changes in culture and the shifting demands of mission. Early Christians in Jerusalem had to learn what it meant to be faithful in Antioch and Rome. Our (Disciples) forebears, as they moved from the frontier to the city, had to rethink such matters as congregational autonomy and the goal of “restoring” the New Testament church. Today, we wrestle with what it means to be disciples of (our Lord) in a world that is increasingly pluralistic, globally connected, and yet so often violently divided.
Isn't that interesting? If you change the word Unitarian or Universalist for Disciples, this is something we need to wrestle with?
So here are the questions that have come to my mind:
1. What are the crucial characteristics of our common life?
2. What are the distinctive gifts of this community of faith?
3. Since the number of people in our communities of faith do not consider themselves Christian, what are we faithful and effective witnesses to/for?
4. In the same vein, what are we disciples of?
And the main question: Who do we say that we are?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)